InfraNest

List servers

list_servers

Read-onlyIdempotent

Every server InfraNest tracks in the organization, a page at a time, with its provider, status, addresses and tags. Filter with search, status, running, datacenter, tag, credential, provider or tracking=untracked, and sort with sort and dir; self-managed machines are counted in meta.counts.self_managed and listed only with provider=self_managed. Here, with no provider, both kinds are listed as one: cloud servers first, then self-managed servers (added with the agent or by hand). Pass provider to list one kind.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "list_servers"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`tag`	No	Only things with this tag id.
`page`	No	Page number, from 1.
`search`	No	Matches name, IP address, datacenter, server type, location or tag.
`status`	No	Only servers in this state.
`per_page`	No	Rows per page, up to 200 (default 25).
`provider`	No	Only servers at this provider, e.g. hetzner, or self_managed for the servers added with the agent or by hand.
`organization_id`	No	The organization to read. Leave it out when the token reaches only one.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedNov 2, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / provider / description

Previous value: -"Only servers at this provider, e.g. hetzner."New value: +"Only servers at this provider, e.g. hetzner, or self_managed for the servers added with the agent or by hand."

First observedOct 30, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds value beyond them by enumerating the returned fields, which matters because there is no output schema. It does not state result ordering, whether the list is paginated or bounded — a small residual gap that keeps this below a 5.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences, zero filler. The returned-field list comes first and the filtering hint second, so the most load-bearing information is front-loaded.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a single-parameter read-only list tool with full schema coverage and annotations, the description covers purpose, return fields and filtering — enough to call it correctly. The one thing an agent might still want (ordering and whether all certificates are returned in one response) is absent, which is minor but real given there is no output schema to fall back on.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

There is one optional parameter and the schema already documents it ('Filter by name or domain'), so the baseline would be a 3. The description earns a bump by specifying substring matching against both name and domain, which is slightly more precise semantics than the schema text alone.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('List all certificate records') and enumerates the fields returned (name, domains, status, expiry, id), which makes it instantly distinguishable from siblings like list_dns_zones or list_domains. An agent knows exactly what this returns without opening the schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The only guidance is 'You can filter by name/domain substring using `search`', which is parameter usage rather than when-to-use-this-vs-alternatives guidance. There is no instruction such as when to use list_certificates versus a detail/fetch tool for a specific certificate, or when to omit the filter. Usage is implied by the noun 'list', but no exclusions or sibling routing are provided.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All InfraNest tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.